mirrorless cameras

All posts tagged mirrorless cameras

I felt as though the handwriting was on the wall two or three years ago as mirrorless cameras garnered more and more of the market share – after all what’s not to like?

Having gone mirrorless I can’t see myself stepping back – apparently the big boys like Hasselblad and Leica are convinced it’s fast becoming a mirrorless world and offering some high end, high priced models.

Canon has kind of toyed with the idea but never really committed until recently – Nikon either has or shortly will follow suite – Pentax is up and running, Fujifilm has been in the game for a while and several other manufacturers have joined the fray.

Like the Borg of Star Trek fame resistance is rapidly becoming futile, and with the abundance and versatility of today’s adapters you really don’t have to invest in an entirely new set of lenses.

Additionally a lot of mirrorless will accept lenses of the same mount made by the same or third party company.

Admittedly I wasn’t much interested in mirrorless cameras initially but once having used a friends camera I quickly changed my mind.

I currently have the Sony Nex 7 and the Sony a6300 and won’t hesitate to say I have a higher opinion of them than any other digital cameras I have owned.

Doing a little bartering labor wise for an a6500 and once that’s a done deal I’ll be passing the 7 and a couple of lenses off to a friend who due to a series of events had to part ways with his Canon 60d, a fine camera.

When it comes to film I began with a used Nikon f4, a revolutionary camera for it’s time – kind of a story with that as a couple who were deep into photography I met in Seattle urged me to begin photography and offered the f4, a couple of lenses, and a crash course in the mechanics

They’d had the f4 for several years, bought it new in fact, and had nothing but praise for it – my good fortune I wound up with it.

I’ve never been much on accepting free things so I rebuilt their porch for them in exchange and was off and running – a journey one might say that led to the taking of hundreds if not thousands of photos on reservations across this country, every mountain range and river I ever spent time in or near, and what I refer to as my “studies” period where I would focus entirely on something like leaves or whatever caught my attention to the exclusion of nearly everything else.

I’ve been threatening to dive into video and done a little, but so far it hasn’t amounted to much more than an idle threat, I mean to correct that though.

New isn’t a priority for me, used is fine if it’s in good shape and functions as it should – as a matter of necessity I learned as child it’s a good idea if you own something you need to be able to fix it and made a point of being able to do so in most instances, something that’s held me in good stead and facilitated more than one acquisition.

Everything you see in the above photo was acquired used, the tripod and rail a good fifteen years or so old, and I’ve yet to have a single problem with any of it.

In the end we all have a tendency to develop loyalties to a product or brand, the arbiter being what works for us and what we’re comfortable with.

That’s a good thing because if you aren’t at ease with what you use the end result will always suffer.

So at least for the time being I’m on the Sony mirrorless band wagon, if you favor another well and good – just get out there and take the photos only you are capable of taking and don’t be afraid to experiment – it isn’t like you’re constrained by wasting film.

My first mirrorless camera was a used Sony Nex 7, took me a little bit to get used to the diminutive size, but from the start I was sold on the 7 for a number of reasons.

One being the camera’s twenty four megapixel sensor and what it was capable of.

Over time there’s been several different lenses mounted on the 7 and I was never disappointed if I held up my end of the deal.

Time passed and I fell into a used Sony A 6300, a gem of a little camera, same twenty four megapixel capability with some tweaks to the sensor.

The 6300 is a fine camera , a little bigger, a little heavier than the 7 with new features like phase detection , 4k video capability, and others.

There were some initial complaints related to the 6300 about overheating when doing video but Sony released a firmware update to address that issue – and while I don’t do a lot of video I’ve experienced no problems.

It may just be me but I’m inclined to believe that with the same lens, in this case a Sigma 60mm f2.8 DN, which may be the deal of the century cost and IQ wise, the 7 seems to have something of a love affair going on with the Sigma that the 6300 doesn’t.

Mounted on a tripod with the identical settings, same Sigma lens, subject, and lighting the 7 renders a better photo.

I haven’t any complaints about the IQ the 6300 produces with any lens, exceptional seems an apt description, but as I say the 7 just seems to embrace this lens for some reason.

I can’t offer an explanation as it’s something of a mystery to me, but I’m not complaining as both cameras have a place in the backpack and routinely used.

I have no hesitation to switch back and forth between the two when out and about – the Sigma 60mm on the 7 and a Zeiss 32mm f.18 touit on the 6300 plus a couple of other vintage lenses for different situations.

I’m a fan of film photography but slacked off of that due to concerns about the chemicals involved – recently I read an article on fstoppers I believe it was about using beer to develop film.

Sounds kinda bizarre and I haven’t tried it but willing to give it a go – I don’t drink and therefore know nothing about beer “quality”, I assume though any beer would work and be less expensive and more environmentally friendly in the bargain.

For those who have a taste for both beer and film this could be like opening a box of Cracker Jacks and finding a hundred dollar bill.

In telling a friend about this he jokingly said “perfect, a good cover story to tell my wife”, and then asked to borrow my film camera.

Truthfully though he’s not much of a drinker, just has a good sense of humor.

I’m not looking to start a riot in saying so but for me at least mirrorless has become what it’s all about as more and more companies are embracing the technology.

Doesn’t mean I’ll give up film if the beer formula actually works only that I believe as I’ve said previously that mirrorless will become to the traditional dslr what the same traditional dslr was to film.

Sony apparently is on the verge of releasing a new mirrorless model named the A9, and though I’m not one to go with pre release reviews or the immediate reviews upon release it sounds amazing.

Amazing, along with a price tag of $4,500 – which translates for me and others no doubt of having to sell a kidney – in the interim as I ponder that decision (not) I’m a happy camper with the 6300, the 7, and my old Pentax Spotmatic.

I’ve always advised people when it comes to camera lenses not to rely on internet reviews as gospel since such reviews are in many ways subjective – they serve a purpose but shouldn’t be seen as absolutes.

What works for one person may not for other,what one person finds acceptable another may not.

If possible pre purchase a person should borrow a friends copy or perhaps rent a lens.Most camera stores will allow a grace return period, you buy it, don’t like, no harm no foul, return it.

A friend who shares the same opinion as I sent the below link – in reading it I couldn’t help but nod my head at the part about if you want to go with reviews give a greater credibility to the most recent ones rather than those that appear pre or immediately following release – the reasons for that should be obvious.

If you read the article you will see what I mean.

Now I don’t know anything about Lensrentals or Roger Cicala for that matter but I believe he makes some very valid points worth consideration.

In addition I’ve always felt “unboxing” videos are a complete waste of bandwidth – what information do you actually gain by watching someone take a lens out of box and roll it over and over?

The thrill or whatever it is is vicarious at best – you aren’t the one unboxing, it isn’t in your hands, there is zero tactile experience, and personally I don’t care what a lens or tool looks like only how it performs.

Isn’t that some part of the equation when it comes to a lens – how it feels, the personal experience of fiddling with focus or aperture adjustments, the heft of it?

There are a few lenses I’ve droned on about in the blog, but I also mention that in doing so I’m expressing a personal opinion and encourage people to do the math for themselves.

It isn’t possible to ask in this venue by a show of hands how many people have purchased a lens based singularly on reviews only to be disappointed – if it were possible I’m sure there would be more than few.

People may search and strive for perfection, but the truth is perfection is elusive, and like beauty resides in the eye of the beholder – so it can only follow that perfection is subjective depending on individual perspective.

Some may feel as though the Mona Lisa is a masterpiece and others a whatever – some may favor a particular brand of camera and lenses while others opt for a different brand.

Is this a matter of right and wrong or personal taste and what works for a person?

I personally believe mirrorless cameras are becoming to dslrs what dslrs were to film cameras and readily acknowledge more than a few would be willing to dispute that.

Yet the fact that Hasselblad has recently released a mirrorless medium format camera to me at least lends credibility to my belief and resistance may be as futile as the film buffs original resistance to digital cameras, time will tell.

There is a tremendous amount of hype associated with photography just as there is with any other industry.

Everything from a “king of bokeh” to the latest absolute must have camera, lens, and accessories that will ramp up the users game – maybe so in some instances and maybe not in others.

But the bottom line is that the majority of shooters don’t have sponsors, they don’t have a lens sent to them to review or write a “pre release” review without ever actually had the lens in hand.

Nor do they have a lot of disposable income, so it becomes in some ways a buyer beware proposition – a do the math yourself situation and that’s all I’m basically saying.

Now I’ve been toying with a Zeiss touit lens the last few days courtesy of a friend, reviews alternately rave about this lens as being five stars, some comments going so far as to proclaim it perfection, but I’ve also seen reviews that low balled it.

Low ball ratings that seemed more appropriate for a kit lens, and this is definitely not a kit lens.

Do I covet this lens? I suppose that’s as good a word as any to use, but it isn’t based on reviews, rather my personal experience.

How would I rate it? Too soon to tell but I will say thus far I’m impressed.

Is it a lens I would recommend? Yes I would while encouraging others to do the math.

One persons perspective or experience doesn’t automatically trump another’s – you either like something and it serves your purpose or you don’t, it’s as simple as that.

Some people like asparagus, I tend to view it as being radioactive – am I wrong, are they, or is it merely a matter of personal taste? I’d say the latter.

Simple answer- no, as perfection is subjective, always has been, always will be.

A reality that lends itself to untold amounts of money being spent in the pursuit and something lens manufacturers are aware of that will guarantee an ongoing market for new and improved.

New and improved is a good thing, but it should be noted there are vintage lenses whose IQ is such they can stand up to modern lenses and remain sought after.

It may be that a lens like Sigma’s 30mm f1.4 in the Contemporary series will at some point become a sought after vintage lens, the same could be said of their DN Art series trilogy of the 19mm, 30, and 60mm f2.8’s.

There is a revolution of sorts taking place in photography, highly affordable lenses that rival and in some cases out perform the sacred cows of Zeiss, Voightlander, and Leica in various areas.

There is a meme of sorts on the internet regarding kit lenses – some saying all are good and it isn’t necessary to upgrade to any sort of prime.

This discussion based primarily on the ability to correct/manipulate either in camera or during post editing.

What can be accomplished in today’s post editing software is nothing short of mind boggling, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to the ability to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear – though that time may come.

Personally I can’t think of a kit lens I’d opt for, with the exception of older kit lenses that accompanied film cameras in the past, and I’m not enough of a contrarian to jump on the they’re all good band wagon.

Normally when you buy a camera it comes with the option of body only or with a kit lens, and the increased price for including a kit lens is usually in the neighborhood of $150 to $200 dollars.

Enough of an initial enticement for many to forego the additional expenditure of opting for a prime.

I understand that as not everyone has a lot of disposable cash to spend, and a lot of people aren’t willing to put it on a card and pay the interest associated with doing so.

It doesn’t take long though before the hunt for a better lens begins and you can find a ton of kit lenses on the net people are attempting to unload to facilitate the pocket book to that end.

Are they doing this because a kit lens is good, or because they’ve come to a different understanding?

That speaks to a number of things – the first being a kit lens doesn’t deliver, fails to meet the expectations of many, and of course the hype and marketing associated with primes.

Now if you know your way around a camera and post editing you can squeeze more out of a kit lens than if you don’t in what can become an act of drudgery. The question is should you have to? Do you want to? And no, presets won’t get it in every instance.

I don’t believe the majority of people with a camera spend countless hours pixel peeping, neither do I believe a person or client who likes what they see does either, and yet some discrepancies, some shortcomings can be so obvious as not to be missed.

The only people who have asked me anything about what gear was employed have been those with the photography bug themselves.

I’ve mentioned previously a project I’ve been engaged in for some time featuring rez life, indigenous people, and culture/architectural related aspects.

Not long ago after some serious collating a person who was previously engaged in the publishing industry took a look at what would be presented, their response was enthusiastic, complimentary, and encouraging.

The only time the topic of camera or lens arose was when I made mention of it. There were a few questions about how did I achieve such a “look”, but that was the extent of it.

A great many of the photos were taken with vintage prime lenses, some on a film camera later to be scanned and digitized, some with a conventional dslr, and some with mirrorless.

I can’t think of anything that would lead me to divest myself of these vintage lenses, but I can’t say the same for a single modern kit lens.

Neither can I envision a time when I could or would spend thousands of dollars for a lens or camera body, and I’m not bothered by that due to the revolution I mentioned above and the availability of vintage primes and forward thinking companies like Sigma, Samyang/Rokinon, and a Chinese company by the name of Venus Laowa that is producing a revolutionary new macro lens for less than $400 that is blowing the socks off of competitors.

I’m a believer in fair market value, the qualifier is how that value is set and to what degree it is manipulated.

Camera cages are an example – is there an appreciable degree of difference in quality and build between a multi hundreds of dollars cage where simple “accessories” like a cold shoe or hdmi clamp cost extra and that of 8Sinns offerings at half or less the price that include the same “accessories”?

Not to my way of thinking, and I believe what 8Sinn is producing is the equal to or better than their competitors.

The marketplace is primarily based upon what the market will bear – now a quality product will naturally cost more, entirely acceptable.

But my contention related to any consumer product is profit is the motivation and I haven’t an issue with that – what I do have a problem with is when the amount of profit reaches what borders on the obscene.

Another example is a nd filter I have made by a startup company and sold as Ice filters. Well constructed, rave reviews, and inexpensive.

A person could spend literally hundreds of dollars for another brand but why should they when Ice does the job admirably?

Should they do so merely to say I have such an such a filter and it cost me multiple trips to the blood bank to acquire the necessary funds, or should they let their photos do the talking?

But as I said much of this is subjective and people should pursue their own likes and dislikes, though it might be advisable to do so with eyes wide open.

Companies like those mentioned above, Zeiss, Voightlander, and Leica have a respected and recognizable brand value based on a history of excellence, but the barbarians are at the gate and I believe they are going to have to make adjustments or lose market shares.

I understand I’m probably not endearing myself to their fans and arguments can abound – for those who advance them I suggest they consider the disparity between what is affordable for some and not for others, and while doing so ask themselves if everyone with an interest in photography should have the ability to capture quality photos or should a country club exist?

The owners of a house I’ve been working on had made a purchase or two at Barnes and Noble and were discarding the bag, thinking it would make an interesting rezinate lens test item I asked if I could have it, I believe I was right, it is interesting and revealing when it comes to a lens performance.

If a person were so inclined to attend a theatrical offering of Romeo and Juliet I imagine it could put a dent in their pocketbook, for those that is true of Barnes and Noble offers a glimpse imprinted on one their bags.

Now I don’t know if this bag is biodegradable or not but in thinking of the persona BN seems to want to project in their cafe/coffeeshop area one would think so.

This particular blog isn’t about BN’s corporate mindset though, it’s about Sony lenses, in the main their 55-210mm f4.5-6.3 OSS and a tip of the hat to the 50mm f1.8 OSS

f4.5 to f6.3 is a “slow” lens, the fact that such an aperture restriction is known to be will surely raise some doubt for any considering this lens.

I’m not sure what Sony is up to but whatever it is they’re on to something as neither the camera nor lens seems to be aware of the slowness of this lens – in the auto modes on a Sony NEX available light almost becomes a secondary consideration.

The less there is the trade off becomes bumping the ISO, ordinarily that can lead to a lot of noise in IQ but Sony’s in camera adjustments do a good job of remediation.

In manual when light is at a premium with a lens of this aperture value it comes down to adjustments based on what a person knows or doesn’t know, but that’s pretty much true of any lens in manual.

The first photo was taken indoors at night without the best of light and no flash using the 50mm f1.8 at a distance of two to two and a half feet.

Photos two and three with the 55 -210mm under the same conditions – all in jpeg, and no editing save for cropping.

Number two at 100mm and three at 132mm with the settings left to the camera, which decided upon an ISO of 1600 – once above ISO 800 on any camera I begin to get a little concerned, but as can be seen ISO 1600 with this lens and camera provides positive results.

There are cameras that will shoot in excess of ISO 50,000 – the only application I can think of is if in the dead of night you had a Sasquatch encounter and wanted to capture a noise laden and blurry photo – which may or may not be a selling point for some.

Lens and camera technology are undergoing major advances – the proof of that is once the market has been saturated with the current offering a new and improved version is presented, the latest must have if you want to be taken seriously, sort of a personal totem.

A problem I have with Sony, and the only one, is their penchant to produce camera model specific lens mounts and designs – they ought to exhibit some consumer loyalty and abandon that approach.

Enter the non oem adapters, inexpensive and for the most part allow operation in manual modes only, which is fine with me but probably not everyone else.

Adapters allow me to use the vintage lenses I own produced by an assortment of manufacturers – each of these lenses have always impressed me with the IQ the produce, yet when coupled with Sony’s sensor they seem to be enhanced, which is pleasant surprise, and that can only be related to the sensor.

All sensors are not created equal, neither are lenses, Sony’s sensor is raising the bar and as I alluded to in a previous blog Leica may well be a little worried especially now that Sony offers full frame sensors in their compact mirrorless line.

Something else I’ve noticed about the 55-210mm is it’s ability to focus closer at the higher ranges than other lenses I have of similar range – I consider that a plus.

Anyway, take a look at the photos. consider the conditions, and decide for yourself if this is a “prime” or not. If you think so and want one a quick look on ebay shows they can be purchased new in the neighborhood of $200.

Bear in mind that they were all shot in jpeg which seriously lacks the detail and information produced in the RAW format.

One other thing – I won’t argue the DG and “aspherical” designations as being what you really need for digital, but none of the vintage lenses I own come which such designations and they will hold their own against and even exceed a lot of high priced DG lenses.